Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-03T08:55:24.162Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Small mammal bone accumulations produced by mammalian carnivores

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

Peter Andrews  and
E. M. Nesbit Evans
Peter Andrews
Affiliation:
Department of Palaeontology, British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, United Kingdom
E. M. Nesbit Evans
Affiliation:
Vincent Wildlife Trust, 21 Bury Street, London EC3 5AU, United Kingdom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Small mammal bone assemblages from the scats of three families of mammalian carnivores are described here as a means of assessing paleontological bone assemblages. These are the Viverridae, Canidae, and Mustelidae. Marking behavior by the carnivores or their use of latrine areas can produce concentrations of bone comparable with those produced from owl pellets, but the nature of the bone assemblages is very different. Skeletal element preservation has a characteristic pattern related to the relative strength of the individual elements, so that the strongest elements are the ones that best survive the physical abrasion of the predator's teeth. Bone breakage is greatest in canids and least in some viverrids. Digestion of the bone occurs to a certain extent with all carnivores, with moderate rounding but little corrosion of either bones or teeth in viverrid-derived bone assemblages, very great rounding and severe corrosion of bone and tooth enamel (but little corrosion of tooth dentine) in canids, and moderate rounding and slight to moderate corrosion of bone and tooth dentine (but less of enamel) in mustelid-derived bone assemblages. Tooth marks are generally rare except in canid-derived bone assemblages. These patterns may enable the identification of predators responsible for the accumulation of fossil predator assemblages, and a consideration of the hunting and other behavior of that type of predator then permit the identification of possible biases in the fossil fauna. In the viverrids, for instance, the mongoose selected for large prey size and against cranial elements, while the genet took all prey sizes available to it and all body parts. Larger canids such as foxes and coyotes took both large and small species, but proportionally more of the most common prey species were present. Skulls were underrepresented. The small canid, the bat-eared fox, selected for the smallest prey species available to it but took all body parts. Mustelids took all sizes of prey, although not necessarily in proportion to their abundance in the habitat, and large species were underrepresented. If the predator type is known, therefore, for a fossil assemblage, these biases can be taken into account in assessing the paleoecological significance of the fauna. An example from the Olduvai Pleistocene deposits is given.

Type
Research Article
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , Summer 1983 , pp. 289 - 307
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Andersen, J. 1954. The food of the Danish Badger. Dan. Rev. Game Biol. 3:1–75.Google Scholar
Andrews, P. 1983. Small mammal faunal diversity of Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania. In: Clutton-Brock, J. and Grigson, C., eds. Animals and Archaeology, 1:77–85. Brit. Archaeol. Rep.; London.Google Scholar
Andrews, P., et al. 1979. Patterns of ecological diversity in fossil and modern mammalian faunas. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 11:177–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bearder, S. K. and Randall, R. M. 1978. The use of fecal marking sites by spotted hyenas and civets. Carnivore. 1(2):32–48. Carnivore Research Institute.Google Scholar
Behrensmeyer, A. K. 1978. Taphonomic and ecologic information on bone weathering. Paleobiology. 4:150–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, W. E. and Chesness, R. A. 1978. Ecology of Coyotes in Northern Minnesota. Pp. 229–247. In: Bekoff, M., ed. Coyotes: Biology, Behavior and Management. Academic Press; New York.Google Scholar
Bunn, D. S., Warburton, A. B., and Wilson, R. D. S. 1982. The Barn Owl. T. & A. D. Poyser; London.Google Scholar
Burton, J. A., ed. 1973. Owls of the World. Peter Lowe; London.Google Scholar
Camenzind, F. J. 1978. Behavioral Ecology of Coyotes on the National Elk Refuge, Jackson, Wyoming. Pp. 267–294. In: Bekoff, M., ed. Coyotes; Biology, Behavior and Management. Academic Press; New York.Google Scholar
Carpenter, G. P. 1970. Some observations on the rusty spotted genet (Genetta rubiginosa zuluensis). Lammergeyer 11:60–63.Google Scholar
Chesemore, D. L. 1975. Ecology of the Arctic Fox (Alopex lagopus) in North America—a review. Pp. 143–163. In: Fox, M. W., ed. The Wild Canids. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.; New York.Google Scholar
Chitty, D. 1938. A laboratory study of pellet formation in the short-eared owl. Proz. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1938:267–287.Google Scholar
Corbet, G. B. and Southern, H. M. 1977. The Handbook of British Mammals. Blackwell Scientific Publications; Oxford.Google Scholar
Dare, P. 1961. Ecological observations on a breeding population of the Common Buzzard Buteo buteo with particular reference to the diet and feeding habits. Ph.D. thesis, Exeter University.Google Scholar
Day, M. G. 1966. Identification of hair and feather remains in the gut and faeces of stoats and weasels. J. Zool. Lond. 148:201–217.Google Scholar
Day, M. G. 1968. Food habits of British stoats (Mustela erminea) and weasels (Mustela nivalis). J. Zool. Lond. 155:485–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, W. R. J. 1973. Analysis of a collection of barn owl pellets from Warmbaths, Transvaal. Zool. Afr. 8:75–82.Google Scholar
Dean, W. R. J. 1974. Analysis of Tyto alba pellets from Angola. Zool. Afr. 9:89–90.Google Scholar
Dean, W. R. J. 1975. Tyto alba prey in South West Africa and the Northern Cape. Zool. Afr. 10:217–219.Google Scholar
Dodson, P. 1973. The significance of small bones in paleoecological interpretation. Univ. Wyoming contrib. Geol. 12:15–19.Google Scholar
Dodson, P. and Wexlar, D. 1979. Taphonomic investigations of owl pellets. Paleobiology. 5:275–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fichter, E., Schildman, G., and Sather, J. H. 1955. Some feeding patterns of coyotes in Nebraska. Ecol. Monogr. 25:1–37.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, B. M. 1977. Weasel predation on a cyclic population of the montane vole Microtus montanus in California. J. Anim. Ecol. 46:367–397.Google Scholar
Glue, D. F. 1970. Avian predator pellet analysis and the mammalogist. Mammal Rev. 1:53–62.Google Scholar
Glue, D. F. 1974. Food of the Barn owl in Britain and Ireland. Bird Study. 21:200–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glue, D. F. 1977. Feeding ecology of the short-eared owl in Britain and Ireland. Bird Study. 24:70–78.Google Scholar
Glue, D. F. and Hammond, G. J. 1974. Feeding ecology of the long-eared owl in Britain and Ireland. British Birds. 67:361–369.Google Scholar
Hay, R. L. 1976. Geology of the Olduvai Gorge. A study of sedimentation in a semi-arid basin. Univ. California Press; Berkeley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hewson, R. and Healing, T. D. 1971. The stoat Mustela erminea and its prey. J. Zool. Lond. 164:239–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, A. 1978. Hyaenas, bones, and fossil man. Kenya Past and Present. 9:9–14.Google Scholar
Jaeger, J.-J. 1976. Les rongeurs (Mammalia, Rodentia) du Pléistocène Inférieur d'Olduvai Bed I (Tanzania): Les Muridés. Pp. 57–120. In: Savage, R. J. G., and Coryndon, S. C., eds. Fossil Vertebrates of Africa. Vol. 4. Academic Press; London.Google Scholar
King, C. M. and Moors, P. J. 1979. On co-existence, foraging strategy and the biogeography of weasels and stoats (Mustela nivalis and M. erminea) in Britain. Oecologia (Berl.) 39:129–150.Google Scholar
Kingdon, J. 1977. East African Mammals III. Academic Press; London.Google Scholar
Korth, W. W. 1979. Taphonomy of microvertebrate fossil assemblages. Ann. Carneg. Mus. 48:235–285.Google Scholar
Koop, K. and Velimirov, B. 1982. Field observations on activity and feeding of bat-eared foxes (Otocyon megalotis) at Nxai Pan, Botswana. Afr. J. Ecol. 20:23–27.Google Scholar
Korschgen, L. J. 1957. Food habits of the coyote in Missouri. J. Wildlife Mgmt. 21:424–435.Google Scholar
Kruuk, H. 1978. Spatial organisation and territorial behaviour of the European badger Meles meles. J. Zool. Lond. 184:1–19.Google Scholar
Laurie, W. A. 1971. The food of the barn owl in the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. J. E. Afr. Nat. Hist. Soc. 28:1–4.Google Scholar
Leakey, M. D. 1971. Olduvai Gorge. Excavations in Beds I and II, 1960–1963. Cambridge Univ. Press; Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lehner, P. N. 1978. Coyote communication. Pp. 127–162. In: Bekoff, M., ed. Coyotes; Biology, Behavior and Management. Academic Press; New York.Google Scholar
Lockie, J. D. 1955. The breeding habits and food of short-eared owls after a vole plague. Bird Study. 2:59–61.Google Scholar
Lockie, J. D. 1959. The estimation of the food of foxes. J. Wildlife Mgmt. 23:224–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockie, J. D. 1961. The food of the pine marten (Martes martes) in west Ross-shire, Scotland. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 136:187–195.Google Scholar
Lockie, J. D. 1966. Territory in small carnivores. Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 18:143–165.Google Scholar
Lloyd, H. G. 1980. The Red Fox. Batsford; London.Google Scholar
Lynch, C. D. 1980. Ecology of the Suricate, Suricata suricata and yellow mongoose Cynictis penicillata with special reference to their reproduction. Mem. Nas. Mus., Bloemfontein, R.S.A. 14:1–145.Google Scholar
Macdonald, D. W. 1976. Food caching by red foxes and some other carnivores. Zool. Tierpsychol. 42:170–185.Google Scholar
Macdonald, D. W. 1979. Patterns of scent marking with urine and faeces amongst carnivore communities. Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 45:107–139.Google Scholar
Macpherson, A. H. 1969. The Dynamics of Canadian Arctic Fox Populations. Can. Wildl. Serv. Rep. Ser. 8. Queen's Printer; Ottawa.Google Scholar
Mayhew, D. F. 1977. Avian predators as accumulators of fossil mammal material. Boreas. 6:25–31.Google Scholar
McNally, L. 1964. Food at a buzzard's nest. Scottish Birds. 3:26–27.Google Scholar
Mellett, J. S. 1974. Scatological origin of microvertebrate fossil accumulations. Science. 185:349–350.Google Scholar
Mills, M. G. L. and Mills, M. E. J. 1977. An analysis of bones collected at hyaena breeding dens in the Gemsbok National Park. Ann. Trans. Mus. 30:145–155.Google Scholar
Mills, M. G. L. and Mills, M. E. J. 1978. The diet of the brown hyaena in the southern Kalahai. Koedse. 21:125–149.Google Scholar
Neal, E. 1949. The Badger. Collins; London.Google Scholar
Parovshchikov, V. Ya. 1963. A contribution to the ecology of Mustela nivalis of the Archangel'sk north. Translation in Biology of Mustelids. British Library Lending Division 1975. pp. 84–97.Google Scholar
Parovshchikov, V. Ya. 1975. A contribution to the ecology of Mustela nivalis Linnaeus, 1766 of the Archangel'sk North. Pp. 84–97. In: King, C. M., ed., Biology of Mustelids: Some Soviet Research. British Library Lending Division, U.K.[Translation.]Google Scholar
Picozzi, N. and Hewson, R. 1970. Kestrels, short eared owls and field voles on Eskdalemuir in 1970. Scottish Birds. 6:185–191.Google Scholar
Poole, T. B. 1970. Polecats. Forestry Commission: Forest Record No. 76. 17 pp. Her Majesty's Stationery Office; London.Google Scholar
Quick, H. F. 1951. Notes on the ecology of weasels in Gunnison County, Colorado. J. Mammal. 32:281–290.Google Scholar
Rood, J. P. 1975. Population dynamics and food habits of the banded mongoose. E. Afr. Wildl. J. 13:89–111.Google Scholar
Schaller, G. B. 1972. The Serengeti Lion. Univ. Chicago Press; Chicago.Google Scholar
Shipman, P., Bosler, W., and Davis, K. L. 1981. Butchering of giant gelades at an Acheulian site. Curr. Anthropol. 22:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shipman, P. and Walker, A. 1980. Bone-collecting by harvesting ants. Paleobiology. 6:496–502.Google Scholar
Simms, C. 1961. Indications of the food of the Kestrel in upland districts of Yorkshore. Bird Study. 5:148–151.Google Scholar
Smithers, R. H. N. 1971. The Mammals of Botswana. Mem. Nat. Mus. Rhodes. no. 4.Google Scholar
Soper, J. D. 1944. Mammals of Baffin Island. J. Mammal. 25:221–254.Google Scholar
Southern, H. N. 1954. Tawny owls and their prey. Ibis. 96:348–410.Google Scholar
Southern, H. N. and Watson, T. S. 1941. Summer food of the red fox in Great Britain. J. Anim. Ecol. 10:1–11.Google Scholar
Stephenson, R. O. 1970. A study of the summer food habits of the arctic fox on St. Lawrence Island, Alaska. Unpublished M.S. thesis, Univ. Alaska, College, Alaska.Google Scholar
Stuart, G. T. 1976. Diet of the black-backed jackal Canis mesomelas in the Central Namib Desert, South West Africa. Zool. Afr. 11:193–205.Google Scholar
Stuart, C. T. 1977. Analysis of Felis libyca and Genetta genetta scats from the Central Namib Desert, South West Africa. Zool. Afr. 12:239–241.Google Scholar
Sutcliffe, A. J. 1970. Spotted Hyaena: Crusher, gnawer, digestor and collector of bones. Nature 227:1110–1113.Google Scholar
Sutcliffe, A. J. 1973. Similarity of bones and antlers gnawed by deer to human artefacts. Nature. 246:428–430.Google Scholar
Watson, A. 1976. Food remains in the droppings of foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in the Cairngorms. J. Zool. Lond. 180:495–496.Google Scholar